After reviewing the applicable factors in this patent case, Judge Mazzant concluded that the defendant had not met its burden to demonstrate that the Northern District of California was a “clearly more convenient” forum than the Eastern District of Texas. The factors that favored transfer included the local interest of the Northern District of California as the “home” of the defendant; the access to sources of proof that are generally available there or that can be made available there; and the availability of compulsory process of witnesses. "Heavily outweighing these factors," the Court observed, "is the fact that this Court has extensive experience with these same patents, including a Markman hearing and claim construction order, and it is much more efficient to conduct the two co-pending trials of these patents-in-suit in one forum." The Court also noted that the Eastern District of Texas could bring the case to trial faster than the Northern District of California, and that the remaining factors were neutral.

Unfortunately this panel fell so soon after last week's bench bar that I was not able to get a post up on it ahead of time, but I was fortunate to be able to pinch-hit moderating a distinguished panel yesterday morning in Houston on the subject of federal courts and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure at the State Bar's 2014 Advanced Civil Trial course.

The panelists included U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal of the Southern District of Texas – Houston Division, Associate Dean Lonny Hoffman of the University of Houston Law Center and distinguished practitioners Richard W. Mithoff, Jr. and Murray J. Fogler, both of Houston.

We spent most of our time talking about the upcoming amendments to the Federal Rules of Procedure (even though they will not take effect until December 1, 2015) which deal with discovery and document preservation, but also covered other topics including pleadings, and technology for hearings. I hope to get a summary of the current state of the proposals up soon, but in the meantime, here's a quick summary of the salient points:

"Proportionality" added to the definition of scope of discovery;

No new limits on number of written discovery (there had been some proposed); and

Rule 37 on sanctions for failure to preserve documents rewritten

Lonny Hoffman provided an outstanding summary of the rule proposals for attendees, which was followed by valuable insights from Judge Rosenthal, who, as a former chair of both the advisory committee on the FRCPs and the standing committee which oversees all of the federal rules, is a veteran of the rulemaking process. Richard, Murray and I sounded the requisite notes of alarm for the practicing bar for any rule changes, since of course everything was better back in the old days (am I getting old, or what?).

Judge Rosenthal also informed us on the new Fifth Circuit pattern jury instructions which are hot off the presses, metaphorically speaking, as well as the new employment law pattern discovery requests which are available for use nationwide. (I don't have a link for the latter, so if any employment lawyers reading this know where they are located, please shoot me an email and I will post it).

It was a very enjoyable panel, and I really appreciated the opportunity to work with these distinguished members of the bench and bar. Nonetheless, after three trips to Dallas and one trip to Houston in the last eight days (some of which were distinctly happier than others), I am very glad to be back in the office and relatively undisturbed for a few days to catch up.

Had one of my favorite moments as a ED Tex lawyer just now.
We just started the panel of actual, real live former jurors from patent cases that will be talking to us about their experiences. When the jurors entered the hotel ballroom for their panel ... the entire room of lawyers and judges stood up until they were in place and seated.
Now that, ladies and gentlemen, is how we do that.

CAFC Judge Timothy Dyk is putting up some interesting statistics on reversal rates for the district on the panel that is up right now. He shows the stats for the year thus far as 38% reversal on mandamus - up a bit over the last few years. The district generates about ten percent of the appellate court's district filings, and has a 94% affirmance rate so far - 14 affirmance, one partial and one reversal.
He and Judge Davis just talked about his recent experience trying a case and hearing summary judgment motions in Tyler.
Alan Fisch is talking about the benefit of trying cases before judges that try a lot of civil cases.

Great morning in Sherman watching the federal courthouse be formally renamed for the late U.S. District Judge Paul Brown.
In a sign of the collegiality among the local bench, every sitting and senior district judge and all magistrate judges were present, as well as the chief judge of the Fifth Circuit Judge Carl Stewart.

The 2014 Bench/Bar kicks off tomorrow morning in Sherman with the renaming of the Sherman courthouse for former U.S. District Judge Paul Brown at 10 am.

The activities (well, aside from golf) continue with CLE at the hotel in Plano at 2pm with panels on not lying to judges (more or less), the past, present and future of the ED Tex, a high Octane panel on patent issues and the Fifth Circuit's new hyperlink program.

Tomorrow evening continues with a reception, opening remarks by Chief Judge Davis, and dinner, which features Dallas law school deans from UNT and SMU, presentation of the Hannah award, and remarks on professionalism by Baylor President Kenneth Starr. After that we have a keynote presentation by Fifth Circuit Chief Judge Carl Stewart, also on professionalism (but less likely to involve discussion of Baylor football), followed by dessert and dancing with ED Tex veteran (in both the courthouse and the dance floor, as we now know) Emerald City (President & Mrs. Bush are not expected to accompany the band).

Thursday morning has panels on patent litigation statistics, practice in the ED Tex, yet more practice on the ED Tex, how to screw up (or not) at trial, and the Mark Cuban trial. That brings us to lunch.

Thursday afternoon is a presentation on legal writing in the cell phone age, and a panel on legal writing in a paperless world. Following a break, we get into how to invalidate patents, and a panel with Federal Circuit Judge Kimberly Moore and some of her former law clerks on practice in the Federal Circuit.

Thursday afternoon is also the panel I have been working on Circuit Judges and District Judges: What Can They Learn From One Another? What Can Lawyers Learn From Listening? with Chief Circuit Judge Sharon Prost and Judge Timothy Dyk from the Federal Circuit, Chief Judge Leonard Davis and Judge Rodney Gilstrap from the ED Tex, Judge Barbara Lynn from the ND Tex (not the legendary blues guitarist, singer, and songwriter from Beaumont, just in case you were wondering), and Judge Sue Robinson from the District of Delaware, with Jennifer Ainsworth, Glenn Thames and I as interactive facilitators. Not often you get six judges like this on the same panel, so I look forward to that one.

Thursday evening has another reception, dinner on your own, and then Reflections of ED Texas/ND Texas 2014 Patent Mock Trial Presented at China University, Beijing with Comparative Ethics. And After Dinner Drinks by the ND and ED Texas lawyers and judges who participated in the Presidential Suite. Discussions are set to conclude at 10:30. Drinking is expected to continue after then.

Friday morning, if we can stagger out of our respective hotel rooms after two nights of conversing about the latest trends in federal court litigation till all hours, we will be greeted with a panel on Hatch-Waxman Behind the Pine Curtain (which had damn well better be accompanied by some choice pharmaceuticals if they want anyone awake), in-house counsel wish lists, patent case management, and patent litigation management (again). Again, the first is an academic presentation, then the second has four judges who might know something about managing a patent docket: Judges Davis and Gilstrap from the Eastern District and Judges Leonard Stark and Sue Robinson from Delaware.

After a buffet lunch, attendees with be treated to a panel on current proceedings at the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, Jurors Gone Wild (that's the next panel which is about juries, not the name of the BPAI panel), and then a panel of actual ED Tex patent case jurors. Whether they will, too, go wild is anyone's guess.

It's going to be an enjoyable few days in Plano - hope to see many of you there.

A Marshall jury in Judge Rodney Gilstrap's court rendered a verdict today in the highly – publicized qui tam False Claims Act action that was tried last week involving highway rail end caps. The jury found that defendants Trinity Industries, Inc. and Trinity Highway Products, LLC knowingly made, used, or cause to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, and awarded $175 million in damages.